Search results

Research serves to elucidate and tackle real-world issues (e.g. capitalizing opportunities and solving problems). Critical to research is the concept of validity, which gauges the extent to which research is adequate and appropriate in representing what it intends to measure and test. In this vein, this article aims to present a typology of validity to aid researchers in this endeavor.

Employing a synthesis approach informed by the 3Es of expertise, experience, and exposure, this article maintains a sharp focus on delineating the concept of validity and presenting its typology.

This article emphasizes the importance of validity and explains how and when different types of validity can be established. First and foremost, content validity and face validity are prerequisites assessed before data collection, whereas convergent validity and discriminant validity come into play during the evaluation of the measurement model post-data collection, while nomological validity and predictive validity are crucial in the evaluation of the structural model following the evaluation of the measurement model. Additionally, content, face, convergent and discriminant validity contribute to construct validity as they pertain to concept(s), while nomological and predictive validity contribute to criterion validity as they relate to relationship(s). Last but not least, content and face validity are established by humans, thereby contributing to the assessment of substantive significance, whereas convergent, discriminant, nomological and predictive validity are established by statistics, thereby contributing to the assessment of statistical significance.

This article contributes to a deeper understanding of validity’s multifaceted nature in research, providing a practical guide for its application across various research stages.

The purpose of this paper, a critical reflection, is twofold. First, by comprehensively reviewing scale development procedures in hospitality research, a concerning lack of nomological validity testing is demonstrated. Second, the need for nomological validity testing is discussed and both conceptually and empirically reasoned.

This research systematically reviews scale development studies in three leading hospitality journals, including Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management and International Journal of Hospitality Management over ten years (2012–2021) to analyze the completeness of scale development procedures. Specifically, the authors evaluate whether the reviewed studies engage in testing the nomological and predictive validity of the newly developed measures.

The results indicate a concerning gap in the current practices in hospitality research. Specifically, only 33.3% of the examined studies assess nomological validity. These findings collectively underscore the need for improving the comprehensiveness of scale development processes in hospitality research.

The study offers important implications for hospitality researchers. The paper provides an extensive discussion on the importance and benefits of testing for nomological validity in scale development studies, contributing to the completeness and consistency of scale development procedures in the hospitality discipline.

This research critically assesses prevalent, and widely accepted, scale development procedures in hospitality research. This research empirically demonstrates the neglect of nomological validity issues in scale development practices in hospitality research. Scale development is an essential scientific practice used to create a research instrument in a field of study, improving our understanding of a specific phenomenon and contributing to knowledge creation. Considering the significance of scale development in advancing the field of hospitality research, the validation procedures involved in the scale development processes are of utmost importance and should be thoroughly applied.

A methodological approach is required that complements studies based on surveys, providing a perspective with greater truthfulness and coverage. The study aims to develop a methodology to validate psychological/managerial constructs using data from Google Trends, taking as a case study a critical thinking (CT) scale in organizational domains previously supported by survey data.

The developed methodology consists of eight stages, in which the following is integrated: (1) Internet search interest data (19 Spanish-speaking countries); (2) deductive research processes (e.g. theoretical model, linguistic manifestations, fieldwork, data matrix, analysis statistical, reporting); (3) psychometric properties (e.g. construct validity, criterion validity, reliability) and (4) objective data to examine criterion validity (e.g. unemployment rate).

The application of the methodology produces evidence that supports the reliability (Cronbach’s alpha, Guttman’s λ₄), construct validity (intra-correlations and correlations with reference variables: “entrepreneurship,” “critical thinking,” “soccer,” “beer,” “pornography”) and criterion validity (prediction of unemployment rate) of the CT scale.

The methodology makes it possible to support or invalidate the quality of construct measurement scales by planning, capturing and processing data available on the internet.

This manuscript is useful for research in business management (and related areas), which is intensive in the use of psychological/managerial constructs.

The methodology uses a new type of evidence; it is noninvasive, usually more truthful than responses to surveys, and has greater coverage of people participating indirectly in the study.

The article aims to present the results of adapting the team boosting behaviors (TBB) scale to Polish cultural conditions and validating it.

The research methodology consisted of three steps. In the first step, I translated the TBB scale into Polish using a rigorous back-translation method. Next, to assess content validity, nine domain experts reviewed the initial version of the instrument for clarity and relevance. Finally, I applied the scale to a sample of 532 team members and underwent thorough psychometric testing to assess construct validity. I employed structural equation modeling (SEM) with the partial least squares (PLS) factor-based algorithm technique for confirmatory factor analysis to assess the scale’s reliability and validity.

After development, the Polish version of the TBB scale kept its three sub-scale structures. However, the validation process led to a slight reduction in the number of test items compared to the original scale.

The findings imply that the Polish version of the scale is a valid and reliable tool for assessing TBB. However, I recommend additional studies to confirm this instrument’s structure.

The results confirmed the reliability and relevance of the tool for measuring TBBs in Polish cultural conditions. The tool provides the basis for implementing further research with the TBB construct in Poland and internationally.

This paper aims to conceptualize and define a construct of brand pride and develop a measurement instrument for the construct.

A scale development procedure comprising a qualitative prestudy and four quantitative studies for item generation and content validity, scale refinement using exploratory factor analyses, scale confirmation using confirmatory factor analysis and scale validity using PLS-SEM is followed to develop the measure of brand pride.

The scale development procedure yields a two-dimensional measurement instrument for brand pride with affective and utilitarian dimensions. The proposed scale is reliable and has convergent, discriminant and nomological validity.

This study highlights the need to study brand pride by reviewing literature from both psychology and marketing. The definition and conceptualization of brand pride help uniquely identify and describe the phenomenon. By developing a scale to measure the construct of brand pride, this study will enable research into the phenomenon, its causes and effects and its significance for consumer–brand relationships.

The study aims to envisage upon conceptualizing and developing the scales of smart health-care supply chain (HCSC) performance in the era of the fourth industrial revolution.

This study has implemented structural equation modelling to analyse the survey data. To analyse the collected data from the field investigation involving a sample size of 323, the IBM SPSS AMOS 26 software package is considered to implement exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) in this study.

The measurement model of the study developed using EFA and CFA has resulted in validating 32 items out of the 42 items. Resultantly, the analysis using the above-mentioned tools and the parsimony of items to scale development makes it more susceptible to contributing significantly to the current HCSC literature.

The HC providers need to consider a holistic and systematic approach while taking into account the constructs of smart HCSC performance, specifically, the effect of HCSC responsiveness and industry 4.0 between the independent and dependent variables. The scales are validated from the perspectives of developing countries such as India, and hence, their generalizability with respect to first-world countries is practically limited.

The scales validated in this study would facilitate managers and key decision-makers to apply the various elements of HCSC practices, gauge the application of these scales and monitor the performance of health-care facilities.

The purpose of this paper is to design and validate a reliable and comprehensive instrument to assess the influence of sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) practices on sustainable performance in hospitals.

A systematic and mixed-method approach was used to create and validate an instrument for assessing the level of implementation of hospital SSCM practices and the perceived extent of environmental, social and economic performance. This includes the development of preliminary items and the evaluation of content and construct validity. Data from Colombian hospitals was collected. Structural equation modeling was used to test the structural model.

During the content validity phase, an initial version of the questionnaire consisting of 88 items was generated. This version was qualitatively and quantitatively reviewed and assessed by six academicians and two hospital practitioners, based on criteria of sufficiency, clarity, relevance and coherence. The computation of both individual and scale content validity indices, along with the qualitative feedback, led to the refinement of the questionnaire. The subsequent phase of construct validity involved the implementation of a pilot test with 55 responses gathered from Colombian hospitals. By considering the metrics of convergent validity and discriminant validity derived from the analysis of structural equation modeling, the final instrument was composed of 59 items. The results reveal that hospital SSCM practices can be conceptualized and measured through two dimensions: environmental and social. The former includes the underlying constructs of internal environmental management, green purchasing and green operations. The latter encompasses the constructs of working conditions and employee well-being, equity management, social purchasing and community development and participation. Sustainable performance is defined by its environmental, social and economic dimensions.

This study is intended to provide useful insights for hospitals, researchers and policymakers to measure and develop strategies to enhance the implementation of SSCM practices, thereby improving sustainable performance. As a matter of fact, the instrument has already been applied in a recent empirical study conducted in Colombia, aimed at addressing the influence of SSCM practices on sustainable performance in hospitals.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to develop and empirically test an instrument for measuring the influence of SSCM on sustainable performance, both in the hospital setting and in an emerging country.

The purpose of this study was to develop and psychometrically evaluate a tool to measure nurses’ knowledge of, attitude toward and practice regarding the elder abuse phenomenon.

This study is methodological research that was conducted in two stages. In the first stage, the available tools related to knowledge, attitude and practice regarding elder abuse were identified through an extensive review of theoretical principles, previous research and related articles. The initial items were extracted and categorized. In the second stage, the psychometric properties of the tool were examined by assessing face validity, content validity, construct validity, internal consistency and stability. Four hundred nurses working in the hospitals of Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences were selected to determine the validity of the structure.

The initial tool consisted of 114 items extracted, 34 of which were removed according to the experts’ opinions. The face validity of the 80-item questionnaire was then examined. The number of the items was reduced to 74 after measuring the face validity. After the qualitative measurement of the content validity, three items were eliminated. After measuring the content validity using a quantitative approach, 8 other items were removed and 63 items remained. According to the content validity index, 1 more item was removed, reducing the number to 62. The construct validity approved three dimensions of knowledge, attitude and practice. Cronbach's alpha coefficient was calculated to be 0.84. The stability was also confirmed through test–retest with a value of 0.85 for the whole scale.

The tool developed for assessing nurses’ knowledge, attitude and practice regarding elder abuse has acceptable dependability and credibility. Given the advantages of this tool, including the simplicity and fluency of sentences, and the comprehensive evaluation of nurses’ knowledge, attitude and practice regarding elder abuse, it is recommended to use this tool in relevant future studies.

This study aims to develop and validate a scale to measure Teacher Entrepreneurial Behavior (TEB), which encapsulates the behaviors teachers employ to identify and amplify innovation in schools. TEB are catalysts for innovation, navigating their peers through risks and building trust, which empowers the collective to transcend structural constraints and pioneer new educational initiatives. Despite the importance of TEB, there is a notable absence of a well-validated measurement instrument.

Drawing on existing empirical TEB studies, this study conducts four interconnected studies following scale-development procedures. The content validity, construct validity, internal consistency, and external validity of the proposed scale were assessed using exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, invariance analysis, and regression analysis.

The result is a multidimensional TEB model featuring 15 items with a good model fit. The TEB scale comprises four factors: Advocating Innovation, Seeking Resources, Cultivating Cohesiveness, and Mitigating Risk.

This study represents a rigorous attempt to develop and validate a reliable instrument for measuring TEB. It provides a validated tool for future research aimed at understanding the nature of TEB as an independent construct and associated dynamics. Accurate measurement is important for the robustness and replicability of research. Furthermore, the insights gained on TEB scale can significantly inform both the preparation and evaluation of teacher leaders by emphasizing the importance of entrepreneurial behaviors in promoting teachers’ collaboration and actualizing innovative initiative.

This research aims to present the results of a study that operationalizes the construct of perceived work identity deprivation (PWID) and examines its validity.

The authors adopted a mixed method design in this study where a Likert-type scale to measure PWID was developed based on the interviews of 40 workers and the questionnaires of 625 participants successively. Later, the generalizability of the scale was tested through quantitative data from 412 workers. Finally, validity analysis was conducted based on 380 usable questionnaires. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS 24 and Mplus 7.0.

The findings of the study indicate that the reliability measures, exploratory factor analyses, confirmatory factor analysis and subsequent convergent and discriminant validity tests support the PWID scale. The nomological validity of PWID is also presented, which demonstrates its predictive validity.

Despite highlighting the importance of work identity, prior research lacked to provide empirical foundations to understand this perception. This study fills this gap in the literature by providing a measure of PWID, distinguishing it from similar constructs and establishing convergent, discriminant and nomological validity. Moreover, by extending the range of theoretical and measurable deprivation of work identity, the authors hope to allow research to take into account a more complete picture of it. PWID scale can be used to develop more relevant suppression plans.